We have received calls from a number of concerned clients who have been contacted by a company called “Lloyd Clarkes” claiming to be able to recover various monies relating to ongoing court cases.

This company gives an address in Belize, Central America, which makes it impossible to verify its directors. When we contacted the Company & Corporate Registry in Belize they confirmed that this company was not registered with them.

The Belize International Business Companies Register confirmed that it does have an entry in that name but that the company is “Not Active”.

You will all be aware of the ongoing nature of the claim with which you are involved, but as ever, you can contact us at any time should you want an update.

It is difficult for us to comment on why it would be in the interest of anyone to have you jeopardise you claim at this stage, and it is particularly strange that this particular company feature almost exclusively information about litigating against timeshare companies on their website.

Please contact us before pursuing any course of action with this, or any other company, claiming to act in your best interest. Whose best interest would be served by the revelation in court that you have tried to recover your legal fees in the UK? The most likely outcome would be your continued responsibility for your timeshares, the associated annual maintenance fees and any associated loans.

This is confirmed in clause 5 of Lloys Clarks own “Terms of Engagement” document :-

” Where you do not wish to continue with The Timeshare Agreement you must expressly notify us in writing at the outset , and you must seek advice from a solicitor”

The clause further confirms that making a claim of this nature could fatally undermine any future efforts to recover the huge sums of money you have invested in Timeshares.

“ Acceptance of any offers of compensation may, in some circumstances, constitute affirmation of The Timeshare Agreement”

We appreciate that there are instances where pursuing legal actions can be a very slow process with dates completely beyond our control but it is clear that decisions recently reached in favour of our clients in the Supreme Court are impacting all aspects of the process of legal recover against timeshare resorts, so having got this far now would be the very worse time to return to that back of that long and lengthening queue.

Mindtimeshare, the self appointed and self regulated, so called “consumer office” has been ordered by High Court n.5 of Las Palmas to rectify a post on their blog from 2013 regarding Reclaimgc /Resaleg SL. It that post Mindtimeshare falsely stated that the police has intervened the offices of the company arresting the staff who had been charged for fraud. This has never happened.

Mindtimeshare, financed by the RDO, who are financed by its members, by the timeshare resorts has been actively attacking companies and lawyers who were filing claims against them to protect misled timeshare owners. In a desperate attempt to damage the reputaion of real consumer friendly companies and lawyers it has launched a complaint against them, of what the presding judge dismissed by saying:

It is evident that the offering of advice and legal defence to anyone who holds a timeshare interest in order to obtain the cancellation of their agreement with any commercial entity that alienates these rights does not integrate the type of offense transcribed. For this reason, at least in the exercise of said activity, Reclaimgc and other entities have not perpetrated any offence.

It is stated in the complaint that such claims are predestined to fail and that the lawyers, who are identified with their full names, act with bad faith and with no qualms.

The undersigned does not share such statement, because some of the claims have prospered and the sentences of first instance that have cancelled certain agreements have also been confirmed by the High Court of Las Palmas. The sentence of the Fourth Section dated 21st of February of 2013 is an example of the aforementioned

We are pleased to see that publishing false information is not accepted by the Spanish authorities, and tough the damaged reputation of a company or an individual can be hardly re-established at least justice has been served.

We feel the necessity to warn everybody to blindly believe in the publications of dubious “consumer offices”, and we strongly recommend to seek legal advice from law firms.

Also we would like to inform our clients that we will not accept any false information published about ourselves and we will take legal actions against all offenders.

We would like to give a short, comprehensive and general update on the Criminal Class Action against Resort Properties / Silverpoint in order to avoid any misleading information from dubious sources

April 2011.- Lawsuit against Resort Properties filed at the Court.

June 2011.- Case accepted by the court and the preliminary proceedings commence.

October 2011.- Silverpoint Vacations SL present themselves to the Court and ask to join the proceedings

December 2011.- State Attorney asks the Judge (i) For an appraisal of weeks (ii) To instruct the Criminal Police to investigate the facts of the case presented (iii) Take statements from the defendants.

April 2012.- The lawyer in charge attends a meeting with the Judge in charge and with the State Attorney to ascertain how far the case has progressed.

October 2012.- The Judge receives an official report from the National Police regarding the activity and people linked to the Resort Properties Group. It concludes that Resort Properties is a product of Silverpoint.

January 2013.- The lawyer in charge asks the Court for witness protection for an ex Resort Properties employee whose testimony will be pivotal to the case.

May 2013.- Silverpoint Vacations SL appeals against the request for witness protection

September 2013.- Having previously identified Barclays and their culpability the lawyer in charge now requests the court to increase Barclays civil liability to cover the full amount of funds involved and not just the interest as previously requested.

October 2013.- The lawyer in charge asks the Judge to order the defendants a bail to guarantee the civil responsible, also he asks the Judge to place an embargo on the assets of Resort Properties/Silverpoints or the seizure of properties as security for clients’ monies.

November 2013.- The lawyer in charge attends the first official appearance at the court in Tenerife. This is a standard procedure in any criminal action in Spain where he has to confirm that he is still representing all 233 victims and that all 233 victims want to continue the proceedings. He also reconfirms the details of the criminal action.

March 2014.- The Judge requests: (i) The appointment of an Expert for the appraisal of the weeks (we know this has been done but so far no report has been received from the expert) (ii) Statement of the defendants.

May 2014.- Silverpoint Vacations, SL appeal against the request for the seizure of assets and/or an embargo to protects the victim’s claims.

June 2014.- The Court rejects witness protection.

July 2014.- The lawyer in charge submits to the Court the written statement of one witness which explains clearly the modus operandi of Resort Properties/Silverpoint Vacations, SL.

July 2014 – The final pending documents and contributions of the victims together with their corresponding translations are submitted to the Court.

September 2014- Starts the accused party´s declaration, where they all rejected (which is in their right) to give any statement

December 2014- Requesting the court to start with the ratification of the claimants

April 2015- Court accepts to start the ratifications

May 2015- Starting the ratifications of the claimants;

May-2015 – Silverpoint asks for the provisional dismissal of the case

June 2015- Oppositions of different lawyers to the temporary closure

Altough there are many pending diligences to carry out which makes the temporary dismissal of the case technically incorrect, the substitute judge (the fourth one in this procedure) has decided to accept it. In the lawyers´ opinion it is contradictory to the Penal Law and therefore it will be appealed.

In Spain the provisional closure is a very common in the penal proceedings, as it only means a temporary cease on the investigation from the court´s side encouraging the claimants to present more arguments and evidences for their case. This transitory dismissal would become permanent if there are no further movements in three years or any other significant evidences without any limitation for time. This is clearly not the case in this criminal class action.

We shall also mention that the Supreme Court of Madrid earlier this year has pronounced on several occasions in the favour of the timeshare owners. They declared time-share contracts with in perpetuity clause null and void, and also confirmed that the floating system is illegal. We are pleased to see that the highest ranking court in Spain is not only dedicated but prepared to fulfill the EU Directive and the Spanish Time-share Law in order to protect consumers.

We are confident to witness a similar victory for all of those who are challenging Silverpoint in the Spanish courts.

This time,THREE of our clients have been released from their timeshare burden by the judge, who has declared their contract null and void and requested the company to pay back the corresponding fees plus interests.

We would like to congratulate the legal team and our clients for this fantastic result. If you would like to know more about this or similar sentences and cases –CONTACT US NOW!

This time, THREE of our clients have been released from their timeshare burden by the judge, who has declared their contract null and void and requested the company to pay back over 165.000€ plus interests and legal fees.

We would like to congratulate the legal team and our clients for this fantastic result. If you would like to know more about this or similar sentences and cases –CONTACT US NOW!

This time, EIGHT of our clients have been released from their timeshare burden by the judge, who has declared their contract null and void and requested the company to pay back over 350.000€ plus interests, legal fees, and on occasions even the maintenance fees!.

We would like to congratulate the legal team and our clients for this fantastic result. If you would like to know more about this or similar sentences and cases –CONTACT US NOW!

Recently we were delighted to announce that we had achieved 43 consecutive wins in various Courts of the first instance in Tenerife against Resort Properties /silverpoint where 8 different independent Judges ruled in our clients favor, basically endorsing and confirming that their contracts with Resort Properties contravened the Timeshare Law.

Of course we knew that Resort Properties would appeal these decisions but all our legal advisors were confident that the High Court in Tenerife would concur with the ruling made in the first instance.

The confidence from our legal team came from two very important factors.

Firstly all the rulings from the Judges in the first instance were extremely clear and applied without any doubt the statute according to the Timeshare Law.

Secondly because there have been at least 22 similar cases from various High Courts throughout Spain where those High Court Judges have also accurately enforced the Timeshare Law and in doing so set a very clear precedence.

With so many solid rulings we rightly expected the Judge from the High Court in Tenerife to apply the same clearly established precedent.

Unfortunately this has turned out not to be the case.

To our lawyers utmost surprise the High Court in Tenerife has overruled the Judge in the first instance and has now ruled in favor of Resort Properties.

For us and all our legal advisors this was both totally unexpected and totally inexplicable especially because of the reason for invalidating the ruling from the Judge in the first instance.

The High Court in Tenerife claims that our client’s contracts are NOT governed by the Timeshare Law(despite resort properties/silverpoint is one of the largest timeshare company ) as our clients DID NOT PURCHASE TIMESHARE and they could not be governed by the Consumer Law as our clients were NOT consumers but were instead “INVESTORS”.

This ruling in our opinion is incredible and inexplicable and clearly confirms that we hugely underestimated the powerful influence Resort Properties has in Tenerife.

It also makes it extremely clear to us that the only way to overcome this ruling of the high court is to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court in Madrid.

Of course this will take extra time , more work , and incur additional fees, but all our legal advisors have confidence in the Supreme Court and they all agree that this is where justice will prevail.

In the meantime we will not just sit back and wait for the Spanish Judicial system to correct this situation but where each client fits the criteria we will also use the UK consumer law where we have already had considerable success.